>> it been quite the night. that does it for us. right now it's a presentation of the cnn republican presidential debate. it's the big night for the republicans. five candidates remain and the biggest round of voting yet. >> in the heart of texas, the final gop debate before a primary night blockbuster. >> on to super tuesday -- >> i need your votes. >> voters in nearly a dozen states could tip the scales of the republican race, just five days from now. >> if you're not going to vote for me, do not vote. >> tonight, the republican candidates in a hard-hitting clash of ideas, appealing to voters all across the nation. >> usa!

usa! >> donald trump on a winning streak. >> let's put this thing away and let's make america great again. >> marco rubio with new momentum. >> now the children of the reagan revolution are ready to assume the mantle of leadership. >> ted cruz on his texas home turf. >> only one strong conservative is in a position to win this race. >> john kasich, looking forward. >> that's where we're going to go, all the way to the nomination in cleveland, ohio. >> ben carson, fighting on. >> we take control of america. i say now is the time to do that. >> it's an epic battle for the soul of the republican party and for a huge prize. a treasure-trove of delegates needed to win the nomination. >> nothing easy about running for president. it's nasty, it's mean, it's vicious. when you win, it's beautiful. >> now, the stage is set for a spirited give-and-take that could shake things up on super tuesday. >> this is serious.

this is not a college football game. this is not a sport. >> the time for games is over. >> do you think this is fun? >> only five republicans are still in the race. and they're ready to debate, right now. >> we're live here at the university of houston, and for the tenth republican presidential debate. an enthusiastic crowd is on hand here in the beautiful operahouse of the moore school of music. texas is the biggest prize. that's tuesday, super tuesday, when 11 states vote. a day that will go a long way towards deciding who wins the republican nomination. we want to welcome our viewers in the united states and around the world. i'm wolf blitzer. this debate is airing on cnn,

cnn international, and cnn in espanol. it's also being seen on telemundo and heard on the salem radio network. telemundo and salem are our partners in this debate, along with the republican national committee. we'd also like to welcome a very special guest with us here tonight. ladies and gentlemen, the 41st president of the united states, george herbert walker bush and former first lady, barbara bush. [ applause ] >> everyone here is looking forward to a lively debate. i'll be your moderator tonight. joining me in the questioning, telemundo host, maria slais and dana bash, and salem radio network's hugh hewitt, who

worked in the reagan administration for six years. tonight, there are five republican candidates. and they're ready to join us right now. please welcome ohio governor, john kasich. [ applause ] senator ted cruz of texas. [ applause ] businessman and real estate developer, donald trump. [ applause ] senator marco rubio of florida. [ applause ] and retired neurosurgeon, dr. ben carson. [ applause ]

ladies and gentlemen. welcome the republican candidates for president of the united states. [ applause ] now please rise for our national anthem, performed by country music artist, dena carter. ♪ oh, say can you see ♪ by the dawn's early light ♪ what so proudly we hailed ♪ at the twilight's last gleaming ♪

♪ whose broad stripes and bright stars ♪ ♪ through the perilous fight ♪ o'er ramparts we watched ♪ were so gallantly streaming ♪ and the rocket's red glare ♪ the bombs bursting in air ♪ gave proof through the night ♪ that our flag was still there ♪ ♪ o, say does that star-spangled banner yet wave ♪

♪ for the land of the free and the home of the brave ♪ [ applause ] >> thank you very much, deana carter. a beautiful, beautiful national anthem. final debate before super tuesday begins right after this quick break.

choose, choose, choose. but at bedtime... ...why settle for this? enter sleep number and the ultimate sleep number event going on now. sleepiq technology tells you how well you slept and what adjustments you can make. you like the bed soft. he's more hardcore. so your sleep goes from good to great to wow! only at a sleep number store, all beds on sale right now save 50% on the ultimate limited edition bed. know better sleep with sleep number. ♪coming soon from progressive, it's "savin' u," the new hit single from the dizzcounts. ♪ cash money ♪ the biggest discount and understand... ♪ the dizzcounts. safe driver, paperless, paid-in-full, multi-car and joey fatone.

♪ savin' you five hundred ♪ i'm savin' you five hundred we have auto-tune, right? oh, yeah. that's a hit! all: yeah! but this year, i can go to block and pay half, what i paid my other guy. you can switch to block and pay half too. half p is a better price, when you think about it. so follow us, we're going to h&r block. [richard] switch to block and pay half.

welcome back to the university of houston and the republican presidential debate. the candidates, they are now in place.

their positions were selected based on their standing in the delegate race, through nevada, with the top candidate in the center and the others extending outward. i want to tell you how tonight's debate will work. as moderator, i will guide the discussion, asking questions and follow-ups, as mr. maria celeste, dana bash, and hugh hewitt. candidates, you'll have a minute and 15 seconds to answer and 30 seconds for follow-ups and rebuttals. we have timing lights that are visible to the candidates. those lights will warn you when your time is up. and as the candidates requested, a bell will sound like this. we know you all want to jump in and debate these critically important issues, but please, wait until you're called on. these are the rules all of the candidates have agreed to. it's time for the candidates to introduce themselves right now. you'll each have 30 seconds. dr. carson, you're first. >> if someone had tried to describe today's america to you 30 years ago, you would have

listened in disbelief. americans know that our nation is heading off the abyss of destruction, secondary divisiveness, fiscal irresponsibility, and failure to lead. marco, donald, ted, john, we will not solve any of these problems by trying to destroy each other. what we need to do is be looking for solutions tonight. it's not about us, it's about the american people. [ applause ] >> governor kasich? >> well, you know, on the way over here, even getting ready earlier and sitting in the green room and watching the early coverage, you know, my father carried me on his back and his father was a coal miner and my mother's mother was an immigrant, could barely speak english. and i'm standing on this stage. it's pretty remarkable. but i want to tell you, there's a lot of young people watching tonight.

you can do whatever you want to do in your life. america is an amazing country, where a kid like me can grow up to run for president of the united states and be on the stage tonight. so to all the young people that are out there, your hopes, your dreams, pursue them. shoot for the stars. america's great, and you can do it. thank you, wolf. >> senator rubio? >> thank you. this election, we have to decide the identity of america and the 12st century, but we have to find out our identity as a party and a movement. 36 years ago, ronald reagan and george h.w. bush began the reagan revolution. for a generation, they defined conservatism, as limited government and free enterprise and a strong national defense. but they also appealed to our hopes and our dreams. now we have to decide if we are still that kind of party and still that kind of movement, or if we're simply going to become a party that preys on people's angers and fears.

i hope we remain that conservative movement that appeals to our hopes and our dreams and the belief that america will always be better in its future than it's been in its history. >> senator cruz? >> welcome to texas. here texas provided my family with hope. here, my mom became the first in our family ever to go to college. here, my dad fled cuba and washed dishes, making 50 cents an hour to pay his way through the university of texas. i graduated from high school at second baptist not too far away from here. when i ran for senate, i promised 27 million texans i would fight for you ever day and not for the washington bosses. and i'll tell you, as i travel the state, democrats tell me, i didn't vote for you, but you're doing what you said you would do, and as president, i will do the same.

>> mr. trump? >> thank you. my whole theme is make america great again. we don't win anymore as a country. we don't win with trade. we don't win with the military, isis, we can't even knock out isis, and we will, believe me. we will. we don't win in any capacity with health care. we have terrible health care. obamacare is going to be repealed and replaced. we just don't win. you look at our borders, they're like swiss cheese. everybody pours in. we're going to make a great country again. we're going to start winning again. we're going to win a lot. it's going to be a big difference, believe me. it's going to be a big, big difference. >> thank you very much. it's now time to begin questions. voters in the first four states have spoken, and mr. trump has emerged as the front-runner, but in five days, the candidates will face their biggest test

yet, super tuesday, when nearly half of the delegates needed to win the republican nomination will be awarded and the biggest prize of the night is texas. immigration is a key issue in this state for all voters nationwide, including the many people watching us tonight on telemundo. so that's where we begin. mr. trump, you've called for a deportation force to remove the 11 million undocumented immigrants from the united states. you've also promised to let, what you call, the good ones come back in. your words, the good ones, after they've been deported. senator cruz would not allow them to come back in. he says, that's the biggest difference between the two of you. he calls your plan amnesty. is it? >> first of all, he was in charge of amnesty. he was the leader, and you can ask marco, because they've been debating this every debate that we've had. as far as coming back in, number one, you wouldn't even be talking and you wouldn't have asked that as the first question if it weren't for me in my opening when i talked about

illegal immigration. it wouldn't even be a big subject. but we either have a country or we don't have a country. we have at least 11 million people in this country that came in illegally. they will go out. they will come back, some will come back, the best. through a process. they have to come back legally. they have to come back through a process, and it may not be a very quick process, but i think that's very fair and very fine. they're going to get online with other people. the best of them will come back, but they're going to come back through a process. >> senator cruz, what's wrong with letting what mr. trump calls "the good ones" come back to the united states. >> the people that get forgotten in this debate over immigration are the hard-working men and women of this country. millions of americans that are losing their jobs, millions of legal immigrants that are losing their jobs or seeing their wages driven down. you know, the past couple of weeks, "the wall street journal" had a very interesting article about the state of arizona.

arizona put in very tough laws on illegal immigration. and the result was, illegal immigrants fled the state. and what's happened there, it was a very interesting article. some of the business owners complained that the wages they had to pay workers went up. and from their perspective, that was a bad thing, but what the state of arizona has seen is the dollars they're spending on welfare, on prisons, on education, all of those have dropped by hundreds of millions of dollars, and the americans, and for that matter, the legal immigrants, who are in arizona, are seeing unemployment drop, are seeing wages rise. that's who we need to be fighting for. listen, we have always welcomed legal immigrants, but i think it is a mistake to forgive those who break the law, to allow them to become u.s. citizens, and that's why i've led the fight against granting citizenship to those here illegally, and that's why i will do the same thing as president. >> mr. trump, do you want to respond to that? >> well, i'm very glad that ted mentioned arizona, because

probably, the toughest man on board is sheriff joe arpaio. and two days ago, we totally endorsed me. so, thank you. >> senator rubio? >> well, first -- >> senator cruz has called your immigration plan amnesty and has an ad out there comparing it to president obama's. he says both of you support allowing undocumented immigrants legal status here in the united states after a background check, paying a fine, and paying taxes. are those claims correct? >> well, first of all, before we do anything, and i've, abundantly clear on this, when i'm president of the united states, before we do anything on immigration, we are going to secure the border. and that's not just the physical border with mexico. it's visa overstays. that's 45% of the problem right there. it also has to do -- that's why we need e-verfy and an entry/exit tracking system and so forth. and until that happens, we're to the doing anything else. and then we'll see what the american people are willing to support. and donald mentioned, because he mentioned me in his answer, that his position on immigration is

what's driven this debate. the truth is, though, a lot of these positions that he's now take rg new to him. in 2011, he talked about the need for a pathway to citizenship. in 2012, donald criticized mitt romney, saying that mitt lost his election because of self-deportation. and even today, we saw a report in one of the newspapers that donald, you've hired a significant number of people from other countries to take jobs that americans could have filled. my mom was a made at a hotel, and instead of hiring an american like her, you have brought in over a thousand people from all over the world to fill those jobs instead. so i think this is an important issue. and i think we are realizing that it's an important issue for the country that's been debated for 30 years, but finally needs to be solved once and for all. >> mr. trump? >> first of all, self-deportation is people are going to leave as soon as they see others going out. if you look at dwight eisenhower in the 1950s, they started moving people out and the rest of them left. self-deportation, as i really define it, and that's the way i define it, is you're going to get some to go, and the rest are going to go out. as far as the people i've hired

in various parts of florida during the absolute prime season, like palm beach and other locations, you could not get help. it's the up season. people didn't want to have part-time jobs. they were part-time jobs, very seasonal, 90-day jobs, 120-day jobs, and you couldn't get. everybody agrees with me on that. they were part-time jobs. you needed them, or we just might as well close the doors, because you couldn't get help in those hot, hot sections of florida. >> that -- my point that i made was you had criticized mitt romney for self-deportation. you said that his strategy of self-deportation is why he lost the election. and i think people in florida would be surprised, because, in fact, the article that was today, they interviewed a number of people, that would have been willing to do those jobs, if you would have been willing to hire them to do it. >> i criticize mitt romney for losing the election. he should have won that election. he had a failed president, he ran a terrible campaign, he was a terrible candidate. that's what i criticize mitt romney -- >> he -- >> excuse me. he ran one terrible campaign. that's an election that should have been won.

>> well, in fact, i agree he should have won and i wished he would have, was, in fact, you did criticize him for using the term "self-deportation." that's on the record and people can look it up right now online. but i want to reiterate, i think it's really important, this point. i think it's fine, it's an important point you raise and we discuss on immigration. this is a big issue for texas and a huge issue for the country. but i also think that if you're going to claim that you're the only one that lifted this into the campaign, that you acknowledge that, for example, you're only person on this stage that's ever been find for hiring people to work on your projects illegally. you hired some -- >> no, no, i'm the only one at this stage that's hired people. you haven't hired anybody. >> in fact, some of the people -- >> and by the way -- i've hired -- >> and by the way -- >> i've hired tens of thousands of people over my job. you've hired nobody. you've had nothing but problems with your credit cards, et cetera. >> let me -- don't me -- >> senator, hold on. >> you haven't hired one person, you liar. >> he hired workers from poland. >> that's wrong. totally wrong. >> people can look it up.

i'm sure people are googling right now. polish workers. fined $1 million for hiring polish workers on one of his projects. he did it. that happened. >> i've hired tens of thousands of people over my lifetime. tens of thousands. >> many from other countries instead of hiring americans. >> just be quiet. let me talk. i've hired tens of thousands of people. he brings up something from 30 years ago, it worked out very well. everybody was -- >> yeah, you paid $1 million -- >> by the way, the laws were totally different. that was a whole different world. >> thank you. >> but i've hired people. nobody up here has hired anybody. >> senator cruz, you say you want to o deport the 11 million undocumented immigrants, but you never want to allow them to come back to the united states. what would happen to the children who are u.s.-born citizens whose parents will be deported under your plan? >> well, existing law provides that those who are deported cannot come back here legally. u.s. citizens can come back. that's existing law.

but let me say, wolf, i really find it amazing that donald believes that he is the one who discovered the issue of illegal immigration. i can tell you, when i ran for senate here in the state of texas, i ran promising to lead the fight against amnesty, promising to fight to build a wall, and in 2013, when i was leading the fight against the gang of eight amnesty bill, where was donald? he was firing dennis rodman on "celebrity apprentice." and indeed, if you look at the gang of eight, one individual on this stage broke his promise to the men and women who elected him and wrote the amnesty bill. but donald funded the gang of eight. if you look at the eight members of the gang of eight, donald gave over $50,000 to three democrats and two republicans. and when you're funding open border politicians, you shouldn't be surprised when they fight for open borders. and i think if you want to know who actually will secure the borders and follow through, you ought to ask, who has a record

before they were a candidate for president, of fighting to secure the borders and stop amnesty, and i'm the only one on this stage that has that record. and by the way, marco is exactly right, that a federal court found donald guilty of being part of a conspiracy -- >> thank you. >> -- to hire people illegally and entered a $1 million judgment against him. >> mr. trump? >> i can only say this. and i've said it loud and clear and i've said it for years. and many of these people are sitting right in the audience right now, your lobbyists and special interests and your donors, because the audience is packed with them and they're packed with you. i've had an amazing relationship with politicians -- with politicians, both democrat, republican, because i was a businessman. as one magazine said, he's a world-class businessman, he was friendly with everybody. i got along with everybody. you get along with nobody. you don't have one republican -- you don't have one republican

senator, and you work with them every day of your life, although you skipped a lot of time, these are minor details. but you don't have one republican senator backing you, not one. you don't have the endorsement of one republican senator and you work with these people. >> senator cruz? >> you should be ashamed of yourself. >> you know, i actually think donald is right. he is promising, if he's elected, he will go and cut deals in washington. and he's right. he has supported -- >> good deals. >> but he has given hundreds of thousands of dollars to democrats. anyone who really cared about illegal immigration wouldn't be hiring illegal immigrants. anyone who really cared about illegal immigration wouldn't be funding harry reid and nancy pelosi, wouldn't be funding the gang of eight. and, you know, he is right. when you stand up to washington, when you honor the promise you made to the men and women who elected you and say, enough with the corruption, enough with the cronyism, let's actually stand for the working men and women of this country, washington doesn't like it, and donald, if you want to be liked in washington, that's not a good attribute for a president.

>> this is robin hood over here. he talks about corruption on his financial disclosure form, he didn't even put that he's borrowed money from citibank and from goldman sachs, which is a total violation. he didn't talk about the fact that he pays almost no interest. he just left it off, and now he's going to protect the people from the big, bad banks. give me a break. >> we'll move on to governor kasich. >> can i respond? >> you can respond, but let me get governor kasich in. he's been waiting patiently. governor kasich? the idea -- you've said this and i want to quote you now. the idea that we're going to deport all these people is ludicrous and everybody knows it. those are your words. should people be allowed to break the law, just because it's not feasible to stop them? >> look, we have a great president here, george bush, 41st president of the united states, he worked with ronald reagan, to pass an effort to try to solve this problem.

a path to legalization. you see, that was a time when things worked. it was a time when president reagan and george bush decided that we need to make the country work. look, i think there is an answer here. the answer is, you complete the border. you let people know, once it's done, you don't have a right to come in. if you come in, we don't want any excuse, you're going to go back. but i favor a guest worker program. i think it's practical. and i think for the 11 or 11.5 million americans, the illegals that are here, if they have not committed a crime since they've been here, i'd make them pay a fine, some back taxes, maybe some community service, and at the end, i would give them a path to legalization, but not a path to citizenship. i don't think we're going to tear families apart. i don't think we're going to ride around in people's neighborhoods and grab people out of their homes. first of all, i don't think it's practical and i don't think it reflects america. you know what happened? the problem with president reagan is we didn't get in there and actually finish the border.

and i think it was probably business interests that affected it. but at the end of the day, let's be practical. let's start solving problems in this country instead of kicking them upstairs with, and with president reagan and george bush, it was a bipartisan coalition to address the issue, and i think we can and should do it again and i will have a plan in the first hundred days to get it done and get this issue behind us. >> thank you, governor. dr. carson? you've been critical of mass deportation. you said back in november, you don't think mr. trump's plan necessarily represents the republican party. given how well mr. trump has been doing with the republican primary voters, do you still believe that? >> i believe in liberty and justice for all. i think everything that we do should be fair. and i've already described, you know, how we can secure the border. we need to secure all the borders, because it's not just people coming in from south america and mexico, but there are terrorists who want to destroy us, who are getting across our borders fairly easily.

and we have to stop that. but in terms of the people who are here already, after we stop the illegal immigration, we need to be reasonable. and i would give them a six-month period in which to get registered, as a guest worker, assuming they have an acceptable record, they have to pay a back-tax penalty, have to pay taxes going forward, but don't have to live underground anymore, and i think they do not become american citizens, they do not vote. if they want to become an american citizen, they go through exactly the same process that anybody else goes through. i think that's the kind of situation that is actually fair to people. and we have other ways of utilizing our facilities and our talents, as foreign aid. doing things in south america and central america and mexico that improve the economy there, so that they don't feel the need to come over here. that would cost us a lot less than borrowing money from china, paying interest on it. >> thank you, dr. carson.

mr. trump? your campaign, as you well remember, began with the idea of building a wall along the southern border, it's about 315 miles southwest of where we are right now. you've said the mexican government will pay for it. >> correct. >> the spokesperson for the current president of mexico says, that will never happen. the last two presidents of mexico say, that will never happen. in fact, the former president of mexico, vicente fox, he said today, and i'm quoting him, he said, i'm not going to pay for that, quote, effing wall. so if you don't get an actual check from the mexican government for $8 billion or $10 billion or $12 billion, whatever it will cost, how are you going to make them pay for the wall? >> i will and the wall just got 10 feet taller, believe me. it just got 10 feet taller. i saw him make that -- i saw him

make the statement. i saw him use the word that he used. i can only tell you, if i would have used even half of that word, it would have been national scandal. this guy used a filthy, disgusting word on television and he should be ashamed of himself and he should apologize, okay? number one. number two, we have a trade deficit with mexico of $58 billion a year. and that doesn't include all the drugs that are pouring across and destroying our country. we're going to make them pay for that wall. now, the wall is $10 billion to $12 billion, if i do it. if these guys do it, it will end up costing $200 billion. but the wall is $10 billion to $12 billion. you need a thousand miles. the great wall of china, built 2,000 years ago, 2,000, is 13,000 miles. we need a thousand, because we have a lot of natural barriers. we can do it for 10 to 12, and this is a real wall. this is a wall that's a heck of a lot higher than the ceiling you're looking at.

this is a wall that's going to work. mexico will pay for it, because they're not doing us any favors. they could stop all of this illegal trade if they wanted to, immediately. mexico will pay for the wall. it's a small portion of the kind of money that we lose and the deficits that we have with mexico. >> if the -- if the mexicans don't pay for the wall, will you start a trade war with mexico? >> you know, i don't mind trade wars when we're losing $58 billion a year, you want to know the truth. we're losing so much. we're losing so much with mexico and china, with china, we're losing $500 billion a year. and then people say, oh, don't we want to trade? i don't mind trading, but i don't want to lose $500 billion. i don't want to lose $58 billion. mexico just took carrier operation, maker of air-conditioners. they just took ford. they're building a $2.5 billion plant. they just took nabisco out of chicago. and i always say, i'm not having oreos anymore, which is true, by

the way. but they just took a big plant from nabisco into mexico. they're taking our businesses. i don't mind. >> senator rubio? >> yeah, a couple points. if he builds the wall the way he built trump towers, he'll be using illegal immigrant labor to do it. >> such a cute sound bite. >> it's not a sound bite. it's a fact. again, go online and google it. donald trump, polish workers. the second thing about the trade war, i don't understand, because your clothes and the tie you wear are made in mexican and in china. you'll be starting a trade war against your own clothes and suits. >> they devalue their currencies -- >> make them in america. >> you don't know a thing about business. >> well, make them in america. >> let me just tell you, they devalue their currencies, china, mexico, everybody, japan, with the cars. they devalue their currencies to such an extent that our businesses cannot compete with them. our workers lose their jobs. >> that's why you make them in china and russia -- >> you don't know anything about it because you're a lousy

businessman. >> i don't know anything about bankrupting companies. i don't know anything about starting a fake university. >> one at a time. >> a fake university! there are people who borrow $36,000 to go to trump university and they're suing him now. $36,000 to go to a university -- >> and by the way -- and by the way -- >> that's a fake school. and you know what they got, they got to take a picture with a cardboard cutout of donald trump. that's what they got for $36,000. >> and they actually did a very good job. i won most of the lawsuit. >> most of the lawsuit. >> i want to bring in my colleague, marie -- >> am i allowed to respond to this? >> you're allowed -- you've been responding. >> i haven't. i really haven't. >> he's talked the through the whole thing. >> here's a guy who buys a house for $179,000 and sells to it a lobbyist who's probably here for $380,000 and then legislation is passed. you tell me -- this guy! >> here's the guy that inherited $200 million. if he hadn't inherited $200

million, you know where donald trump would be right now, selling watches -- >> no, no, no, that is so wrong. we'll work on that. i took $1 million and i turned it into $10 billion. i borrowed $1 million -- >> then release your tax return. >> i borrowed $1 million -- >> he doesn't make that much money. >> thank you. i want to bring in maria celeste of telemundo. >> senator rubio, last week you said that on your first day in office, you will get rid of president obama's executive action, known as deferred action for childhood arrivals, daca for short. it's a program that has protected hundreds of thousands of young people that came here when they were children, brought to the u.s. by undocumented immigrants. this is the only home they know. and that is a dramatic change from last april, when you said in spanish, and i'm going to quote you -- [ speaking spanish ]

which translates to, daca is going to have to end at some point, but it wouldn't be fair to cancel it immediately. so senator rubio, what changed? >> it didn't change. >> why is it now fair to cancel it on day one? >> no, it's the same policy. it will have to end at some moment, and as i said, we will eliminate that executive order. the people that are on it now will not be allowed to renew it and new applicants will now be allowed to apply to it. and it's not because we're not compassionate to the plight of someone who came here when they were 2 years old. we understand. i know people who are personally impacted by that. the problem with the executive order is it is unconstitutional. the president doesn't have the power to do that. and he himself admitted that. >> senator, senator -- >> i'm sorry, but -- >> but you went from saying that it was deeply disruptive to deport them immediately to deport them on day one. >> no, this is not about deportation. everybody always goes immediately to the issue of deportation. this is about daca. daca is an executive order that is unconstitutional. i will cancel it on my first day in office.

which means people who currently hold those perms will not be allowed to renew them when they expire and new people will not be able to apply them. i am sympathetic to the plight of people who came here when they were 2 or 3 years old through no fault of their own. no matter how sympathetic we may be to a cause, we can not violate the constitution of the united states the way this president now does on a regular basis. >> senator rubio, you accused senator cruz in a previous debate of lying when he said that you said one thing in spanish and another one in english. so in what sense did he lie? >> because it is not true that i'm not going to get rid of daca. i am going to get rid of daca. in the spanish interview, you just read out the transcript in spanish, i said, it will have to end. that will be when i eliminate the executive order and the people who have those permits when they expire will not be able to renew it. and new people will not be

allowed to apply. and that is how the program ends and how you wind it down. you allow the people who are on it, when the program expires, they cannot renew it, and it goes away. but i will cancel the executive order as soon as i take -- as soon as i step foot into the oval office. >> i have to say, he lied this time. he lied. 100%. 100%. >> you lied about the polish workers. >> yeah, yeah, yeah. 38 years ago. >> oh, he lied 38 years ago. i guess there's a statute of limitation on lies. >> maria, i would note you made the exact same point i made at the last debate and i would agree senator rubio called me a liar for saying that. we've all seen at home when politicians say, it will have to end some day in the future. that is inevitably when a politician doesn't plan to end it at all.

i'm reminded of, that is the same position that marco took in iowa on ethanol subsidies. when i campaigned in iowa and took on the lobbyists, took on the corporate welfare, and said, we should have no ethanol subsidies, marco's position was the same as it is towards illegal amnesty. well, some day it should end, just not now. and frankly, i think we need a president who knows what he believes and is willing to say it on day one, not at the end of his term when it's somebody else's problem. >> that's not an accurate assessment of what i said about ethanol. what i said is ethanol will phase out. it is facing out now. by 2022, that program expires, by virtue of the existing law and at that point it will go away. i don't agree with the mandate and the program that's in place. but i think it's unfair that these people have gone out and invested all this money into this program and we're just going to yank it away from them. and again, you read the statement in spanish. i said very clearly on spanish television, daca will have to end at some point, and at that time, i was not a candidate for president. i said, it will end on my first day in office as president, and the people who have it now will

not be able to renew it and new applicants will not be able to apply. that is the end of daca. i am sympathetic to this cause. but once again, it cannot supersede the constitution of the united states, which this president habitually and routinely, every single day, ignores and violates. >> senator cruz, you and senator rubio are the two candidates of hispanic descent on the stage. as a matter of fact, you are the first hispanic candidate ever to win a caucus or primary. and yet there is the -- and yet there is the perception in the latino community that instead of trying to prove to latinos who has the best plan, the best platform to help them, that you two are spending the time arguing with each other, trying to figure out which one is tougher on immigration, in order to appeal to the majority of republicans. so my question to you is, are you missing a huge opportunity to expand the republican base?

>> well, maria, listen. you are right. it is extraordinary that out of the five people standing on this stage, that two of us are the children of cuban immigrants. it really is an embodiment of the incredible opportunity and promise this nation provides. you know, i would note that a lot of folks in the media have a definition of hispanics that you could only be hispanic if you're liberal. that makes sense in the media, but i've got to tell you, one of the things i was most proud of, when i ran for senate here in texas, i earned 40% of the hispanic vote here in texas, at the same time, mitt romney was getting clobbered with 27% of the hispanic vote nationwide. and the reason is, as you know, you look at the values in the hispanic community, the values in our community are faith, family, patriotism. you know, we've got the highest rate of military enlistment among hispanics of any demographic in this country. and when i campaigned and i campaigned the same here in houston or dallas, as i did down in the rio grande valley, defending conservative principles, defending

judeo-christian principles, telling my father's story. telling my dad's story of coming to america with $100 in his underwear, not speaking english, washing dishes, having hopes and dreams for the american dream, and the truth is, the obama/clinton economy has done enormous damage to the hispanic community. it is not working in the hispanic community, and i am fighting so that everyone who is struggling in the hispanic community and beyond will have a fair and even shake and the american dream. >> maria, i was mentioned in that. >> governor kasich -- >> i was mentioned. i'll be brief. a couple points. number one, i do think it's amazing that on the stage tonight, there are two descends of immigrants of cuban origin and an african-american. we are the party of diversity. not the democratic party. and the second point i would make is that we have to move past this idea that somehow the hispanic community only cares about immigration. yes, it's an important issue, because we know and love people

that have been impacted by it. but i'm going to tell you, the most powerful sentiment in the hispanic community, as it is in every immigrant community is the burning desire to leave your children better off than yourself. and you can only do that through free enterprise. that's what we stand for. not socialism, like bernie sanders and increasingly hillary clinton. >> governor kasich, after the last presidential election, the republican party realized that in order to win the presidency, it needed the support of latinos. guidelines as to how to accomplish that were spelled out in an autopsy report that concluded, and i'm going to quote it, if hispanic americans hear that the gop in the united states, they won't pay attention to our next sentence. so do you think that your fellow republican candidates get it? >> well, i'm not going to talk about that. i've got to tell you, i was with this little 12-year-old girl, was at a town hall meeting, and she said, you know, i don't like

all this yelling and screaming at the debates. my mother's thinking i might not be able to watch the thing anymore. i think we ought to move beyond that. about what they think. i'm going to tell you what i think. my position on this whole immigration issue has been clear from the beginning. i haven't changed anything with it. and, look, my view is, we need economic growth. everything starts with economic growth. and how do you get it? common sense regulations, lower taxes for both business and individuals, and, of course, a fiscal plan that balances the budget. that gives you economic growth. i did it when i was in washington as the budget committee chairman, negotiating actually with democrats that gave us surpluses, economic growth, and the same thing in ohio. but here's the thing that i believe. economic growth is not an end unto itself. we have no make sure that everybody has a sense that they can rise. of course, our friends in the hispanic community, our friends in the african-american community, the promise of america is that our system, when

we follow the right formula, is going to give opportunity for everyone. it's what jack kemp used to say. a rising tide lifts all boats, not just some boats, but all boats. and you know what? with me in the hispanic community, i think they like me. and i appreciate that, because i want them to have the same opportunity that i and my children and my wife and the people we love have had in this country. it's time to solve problems. >> dr. carson, concerning this recommendation of the report, are you, as a candidate, getting it? >> i didn't hear the first part of the question. >> the first part of the question is, there was a report that recommended that in order to approach hispanics and bring them to vote for the republican party, certain things needed to happen. and one of them was that they shouldn't feel like they were going to get kicked out of the united states, otherwise they wouldn't pay attention to one more sentence from candidates. >> okay, well, first of all, let me just mention that last year

at naleo, the national association for latino elected officials, i was the only one of 17 republican candidates to go there. and the reason that i don't fear going to an organization like that is because the message that i give is the same message to every group. you know, this is america. and we need to have policies that are -- that give liberty and justice to all people, and that's the way that i have fashioned virtually every policy, looking at that. and that's the way the republican party generally thinks. we don't pick and choose winners and losers. we are compassionate. but real compassion is providing people with a ladder of opportunity to climb up from a state of dependence and to become part of the fabric of america. when we begin to emphasize that, i think we will attract everybody. >> mr. trump, it is common knowledge that the hispanic vote is very important in this race.

you keep saying that hispanics love you. >> true. >> and, yes, you won the hispanic vote in nevada. >> true. >> but a brand-new telemundo poll says that three out of four hispanics that vote nationwide have a negative opinion of you. they don't like you. wouldn't that make you an unelectable -- >> no. >> -- candidate in a general election? >> first of all, i don't believe anything telemundo says. >> you used to say that you love -- >> number one. number two. i currently employee thousands of hispanics, and over the years, i've employed tens of thousands of hispanics. they're incredible people. they know, and the reason i won in nevada, not only won the big one, but i also won subs, like, as an example, i won with women. i won with every single category. i won with men, i won with high-income, i won with low-income, i won with hispanics and i got 46%. nobody else was close. because they know i'm going to bring jobs back from china, from

japan, from so many other places. they get it. they're incredible people, they're incredible workers. they get it. and i've won many of the polls with hispanics. i didn't maybe win the telemundo poll, but one thing i'm also going to go, i'm bringing a lot of people in who are democrats, who are independents, and you're seeing that with the polls. because if you look at anywhere, look at any of the elections. every single election, it's been record-setting. and the good news is, for the republican party, the democrats are getting very poor numbers in terms of bringing them in. we're getting record-setting numbers. i think i have something to do with that. we're getting record-setting numbers. and i won every one -- the three of them that i won, i won with record-setting numbers. new people are coming into the republican party. we are building a new republican party. a lot of new people are coming in. >> for the record, you have said, publicly, that you love telemundo in the past.

but it is not just a telemundo poll. >> i love them. i love them. >> all right, well, it's not the only poll. >> they're fine. you know what, they're fine. >> let me finish, please. >> they're fine. >> just last night, "the washington post" showed that 80% of hispanic voters in their polls have a negative view of you. and concerning the nevada victory, allow me to explain that the poll in nevada was based on a tiny sample, statistically insignificant, of only like a hundred -- >> oh, i see. >> -- let me finish, please. of 100 hispanic republicans in the state of nevada. >> why did they take the poll? why did they waste the time? >> i am making reference to hispanic voters nationwide in a general election. >> i'm just telling you, i'm doing very well with hispanics. and by the way, i settled my suit, as you know, with univision. it was settled. we're good friends now. it was all settled. done. very happy. very happy. very good people. but i'm just telling you, i'm

just telling you that i will do really well with hispanics. i will do better than anybody on this stage. i have respect for the people on this stage, but i will do very well with hispanics. but i'm telling you also, i'm bringing people, democrats over, and i'm bringing the independents over, and we're building a much bigger, much stronger republican party. >> mr. trump, thank you. i want to turn our attention now to another critically important issue for the american people, the united states supreme court. where filling the vacancy left by the late justice antonin scalia has become a major campaign issue. i want to bring in salem radio network host hugh hewitt. hugh? >> thank you, wolf. to me, it's the most important issue. i'll start with you, senator cruz. do you trust mr. trump to nominate conservative justices? >> well, hugh, i agree with you that justice scalia's passing underscores the enormous gravity of this election. justice scalia was someone i knew personally for 20 years, was privileged to be at his funeral this weekend.

and with his passing, the court is now hanging in the balance. we are one liberal justice away from a five-justice radical, leftist majority that would undermine our religious liberty, that would undermine the right to life, and that would fundamentally erase the second amendment right to keep and bear arms from the constitution. now, i think the voters of texas, the voters across super tuesday are assessing everyone's standing on this, this stage. in the past, republican presidents always promise to nominate strict constitutionalists. so i'm certain if you took a survey, everyone would say they would do that. but the reality is, democrats bat about a thousand. just about everyone they put on the court votes exactly as they want. republicans have batted worse than .500. more than half of the people we put on the court have been a disaster. i've spent my whole life fighting to defend the bill of rights and the constitution. and i can tell you that for voters that care about life or marriage or religious liberty or

the second amendment, they're asking the question, who do you know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, who do you know will nominate principled constitutionalists to the court? i give you my word, every justice i nominate will vigorously defend the bill of rights for my children and for yours. >> mr. trump, senator cruz mentioned the issue that keeps me up at night, which is religious liberty. churches, catholic and christian colleges, catholic adoption agencies, all sorts of religious institutions fear that hobby lobby, if it's repealed, it was a 5-4 decision, they're going to have to bend their knee and provide morning-after pills. they fear that if bob jones is expanded, they will lose their tax exemption. will you commit to voters tonight that religious liberty will be an absolute litmus test for anyone you appoint, not just to the supreme court, but to all courts? >> yes, i would. and i've been there and i've been there very strongly. i do have to say something, and this is interesting and it's not

anybody's fault. it's not ted's fault. justice roberts was strongly recommended and pushed by ted. justice roberts gave us obamacare. might as well be called robertscare. two times of the supreme court, justice roberts approved something that he should have never raised his hand to approve. and we ended up with obamacare. that is a rough thing, and i know ted feels badly about it, and i think he probably still respects the judge, but that judge has been a disaster in terms of everything we stand for. because there is no way, no way that he should have approved obamacare. now, with that being said, these are the things that happen. but ted very, very strongly pushed judge roberts and justice roberts gave us something that we don't want. >> ted cruz, senator, the chief justice got hobby lobby right, but what do you make of mr. cruz's criticism? >> listen, donald knows that it was george w. bush that appointed john roberts. yes, it's true, i supported the

republican nominee once he was made. but i would not have nominated roberts, i would have nominated my former boss, mike lewdick. he was the strongest proven conservative on the court of appeals. and it's interesting that donald says he will appoint justices that will defend religious liberty, but this is a man for 40 years has given money to jimmy carter, to joe biden, to hillary clinton, to chuck schumer, to harry reid. nobody who supports far-left liberal democrats who are fighting for judicial activists can possibly care about having principled constitutionalists on the court. and what donald has told us is he will go to washington and cut a deal. so that means on supreme court, he's going to look to cut a deal rather than fight for someone who won't cut a deal on the constitution, but will defend it faithfully. >> can i trust you on religious liberty? >> let me just say this. i watch ted, and i respect him, but he gets nowhere, stand on

the senate floor for a day or two days and talk and talk and talk. i watched the other senators laughing and smiling. and when ted was totally exhausted, he left the senate floor and they went back to work. we have to have somebody who make deals. it's wonderful to stand up and do that. i have a sister who's a brilliant -- excuse me! she's a brilliant judge. he's been criticizing my sister for signing a certain bill. you know who else signed that bill? justice samuel alito, a very conservative member of the supreme court, with my sister, signed that bill. so i think that maybe we should get a little bit of an apology from ted. what do you think? >> let me -- senator. >> let me tell you right now, donald, i will not apologize for a minute for defending the constitution. i will not apologize for defending the bill of rights. and i find it amazing that your answer to hugh and to the american people is on religious liberty. you can't have one of the these crazies zealots that actually believes in it. you've got to be willing to cut a deal. and you know, there is a reason why when harry reid was asked of all the people on this stage, who does he want the most, who does he like the most, harry

reid said, donald trump. why? because donald has supported him in the past, and he knows he can cut a deal with him. you know what, donald, i don't want a supreme court justice that you cut a deal with harry reid to undermine religious liberty, because that same justice will also erase the second amendment from the bill of rights. >> when you say crazy zealot, are you talking about you? crazy zealot. give me a break. >> senator rubio, you've heard this exchange on religious liberty. you said that religious liberty will trump even the ability of people to stay away from same-sex marriages, not provide flowers, not provide baked goods, et cetera. are you satisfied with this exchange on religious liberty? >> i think you ask a very important question. because the issue here, the next president of the united states has to fill this vacancy. justice scalia, in the history of the republic, there has never been anyone better than him at standing for the principle that the constitution is not a living and breathing document, it is supposed to be applied as originally meant. and the next president of the united states must be someone

you can trust and believe in, to appoint someone just as good as scalia, and there could be two other vacancies. you ask mr. trump to respond and say that he would, and he says that he would. but if you look at his record over the last 25 to 30 years, on issue after issue, he has not been on our side. if he's changed, we're always looking for converts into the conservative movement. the bottom line is, you don't have a record there to look at and say, i feel at peace, that when donald trump is president of the united states, he's going to be firmly on our side, on these issues. in fact, very recently, he was still defending planned parenthood. he says he's not going to take sides in the palestinians versus israel. these are concerning things. and so, yes, i have a doubt about whether donald trump, if he becomes president, will replace justice scalia with someone just like justice scalia. >> mr. trump? >> well, let me just say, let me just say, first of all, i have great respect for justice scalia. i thought he was terrific. and if you talk about evolving, ronald reagan was a somewhat liberal democrat. ronald reagan evolved into a somewhat strong conservative. more importantly, he was a great president.

a great president. as far as planned parenthood is concerned, i'm pro-life. i'm totally against abortion having to do with planned parenthood, but millions and millions of women, cervical cancer, breast cancer, are helped by planned parenthood. so you can say whatever you want, but they have millions of women going through planned parenthood that are helped greatly. and i wouldn't fund it. i would defund it because of the abortion factor, which they say is 3%. i don't know what percentage it is. they say it's 3%. but i would defund it because i'm pro-life. but millions of women are helped by planned parenthood. >> governor kasich, back to religious liberty. you've been a little bit less emphatic. you've said same-sex couple approaches a cupcake maker, sell them a cupcake. can we trust you as much on religious liberty as the rest of these people? >> i mean, of course. and i was involved in just being a pioneer in a new church. religious institutions should be able to practice the religion that they believe in. no question and no doubt about it.

now, in regard to same-sex marriage, i don't favor it. i've always favored traditional marriage, but, look, the court has ruled and i've moved on. and what i've said, hugh, is that, look, where does it end? if you're in the business of selling things, if you're not going to sell to somebody you don't agree, okay, today i'm not going to sell to somebody who's gay, and tomorrow maybe i won't sell to somebody who's divorced. if you're in the business of commerce, conduct commerce. that's my view. and if you don't agree with their lifestyle, say a prayer for them when they leave and hope they change their behavior. but when it comes to the religious institutions, they are inviolate in my mind, and i would fight for those religious institutions. and look, i've appointed over a hundred judges as governor. i even appointed a judge to the ohio supreme court. and you know what they are? they're conservatives.

that's unfair. and this is the responsibility of congress to come back and correct what the supreme court has done. that's why we have divided government. and we're going to have to encourage them to act in an appropriate way, or we will lose our religious freedom. and as president, i will go through and i will look at what a person's life has been. what have they done in the past, what kind of judgments have they made? what kind of associations do they have? that will tell you a lot more than an interview will tell you. the fruit salad of their life is what i will look at. >> thank you, dr. carson. all of you want to repeal and replace obamacare, so let's talk about your plan, specific plans to replace it. i want to bring in our chief political correspondent, dana bash. >> senator rubio, you said yesterday, right here in houston, that mr. trump thinks that part of obamacare is pretty good. so, he says he is going to repeal obamacare. are you saying that you're worried he won't? >> he said he likes the individual mandate portion of it.

which i don't believe that should be part of it. that should not remain there. i think here's what we need to replace it with. we need to repeal obamacare completely and replace it with a system that puts americans in charge of their health care money again. if your employer wants to buy health insurance for you, they can continue to do so so from any company in america they want to buy it from. otherwise, your employers can provide you health care money, tax-free, not treated as income, and you can use that money only for health care, but you can use it to fund health care any way you want, fully fund a health savings account, the combination of a health savings account or a private plan from any company in any state in the country. and if you don't have that, then you will have a refundable tax credit that will provide you money to fund your own health care. and i think that's a much better approach than obamacare. it's not only bad for health care, but bad for our economy. it's forcing people to lay people off, cut people's hours, move people to part-time. it's a job-killing law and i will repeal it as president and we will replace it with something substantially better for all americans.

>> mr. trump, senator rubio just said that you support the individual mandate. >> i just want to say, i agree with that 100%, except pre-existing conditions. i would absolutely get rid of obamacare, we'll have something much better, but pre-existing conditions, when i'm referring to that, and i was referring to that very strongly on the show with anderson cooper, i want to key pre-existing conditions. i think we need it. i think it's a modern age, and i think we have to have it. >> okay, so let's talk about pre-existing conditions. what the insurance companies say is that the only way they can cover people is to have a mandate requiring everybody purchase health insurance. are they wrong? >> i think they're wrong 100%. what we need -- look, the insurance companies take care of the politicians. the insurance companies get what they want. we should have gotten rid of the lines around each state so we could have real competition. we thought that was gone. we thought those lines were going to be gone and something happened at the last moment where obamacare got approved and

all of that was thrown out the window. the reason is some of the people in the audience are insurance people and insurance lobbyists and special interests. they got -- i'm not going to point to these gentleman. of course, they're part of the problem, other than ben, in all fairness, and actually, the governor too. let's just talk about these two, okay? because i don't think the governor had too much to do with this. but we should have gotten rid of the borders, gotten rid of the lines around the state so there's great competition. the insurance companies are making a fortune on every single thing they do. i'm self-funding my campaign. i'm the only one in either party self-funding my campaign. i'm going to do what's right. we have to get rid of the lines around the states, so there's serious, serious competition. and you're going to see -- excuse me. then you're going to see pre-existing conditions and everything else be part of it, but the price will be done. and the insurance companies can pay. right now, they're making a fortune. >> just to be specific here, what you're saying is getting rid of the barriers between states, that is going to solve the problem of pre-existing --

>> that's going to solve a lot of the problems. and the insurance companies aren't going to say that. they want to keep it. they'll say whatever they have to say to keep it the way it is. i know the insurance companies. they're friends of mine. the top guys, they're friends of mine. i shouldn't tell you guys, it's terrible, you'll say i have a conflict of interest. they're friends of mine. some of them are in the audience. one of them was waving to me, he was laughing and smiling. he's not laughing so much anymore. hi. but you know what? the insurance companies are making an absolute fortune. yes, they will keep pre-existing conditions and that would be a great thing. get rid of obamacare. we'll come up with new plans, but we should keep pre-existing conditions. >> and i mentioned in his response, so if i may about the insurance companies, you may not be aware of this, donald, because you don't follow this stuff very closely, but here's what happened. when they passed obamacare, they put a bailout fund in obamacare. all of these lobbyists they keep talking about, they put a bailout fund in the law that would allow taxpayer money to be used to bail out companies when they lost money. and we led the effort and wiped

out that bailout fund. the insurance companies aren't in favor of me. they hate that. they're suing to get that bailout money to be put back in. this is an important thing. what is your plan? i understand the lines around the state, whatever that means. this is not a game where you draw maps -- >> you don't know what it means. that is the problem. >> what is your plan? >> the biggest problem, he doesn't know. the biggest problem he's got is he doesn't know. >> what's his plan? >> i watched him melt down two weeks ago with chris christie, i've got to tell you, the biggest problem he's got is he really don't know about the lines. the biggest thing we've got and the reason we have no competition is because we have lines around the state and you have -- >> you already mentioned that as part of my plan. i know what that is. what else is part of your plan? the only thing is to get rid of the lines around the states? what else is part of your health care? >> what the lines around the state means -- and you were almost done. excuse me. excuse me. excuse me. >> what's your plan? >> brings in competition. when you get rid of the lines, it brings in competition. so instead of having one insurance company taking care of new york or texas, you'll have many.

they'll compete. and it will be a beautiful thing. >> right and what -- so that's the only part of the plan? just the lines. the interstate competition? >> the nice part about -- you have many different plans. you'll have competition. you'll have so many different plans. >> now he's repeating himself. >> no, i'm not -- no, no, no, no. >> mr. trump? >> no, no, no. i don't repeat myself. i don't repeat myself. >> you don't repeat yourself? >> here's the guy who repeats himself. i don't -- >> you repeat yourself every day. >> talking about repeating. i watched him repeat himself five times four weeks ago -- >> i saw you repeat yourself five times five seconds ago. >> i watched him. i watched him melt down on the stage like i've never seen anybody -- >> let's stay -- >> -- swimming pool.

>> -- focused. >> i said -- >> let's talk about your plan. >> he says five things, everyone's dumb, he's going to make america great again. win, win, win. he's winning in the polls. and the lines around the states. every night. same thing. >> senator rubio. >> i tell the truth. i tell the truth. >> senator rubio. you will have time to respond, if you can just let mr. trump respond. if you can talk a little bit more about your plan. >> we're going to have many different plans -- >> he's done it again! >> there's going to be competition. there is going to be competition among all of the states and the insurance companies. they're going to have many, many different plans. >> is there anything else that you would like to add to that? >> no, there's nothing to add. what's to add? what is to add? >> thank you both. >> all right. >> governor kasich, you have said it is, quote, un-american to deny someone health insurance if they have a pre-existing condition. would you leave the individual mandate in place, requiring all americans to purchase insurance? >> no, i wouldn't. but that doesn't matter when it

comes to the issue of pre-existing conditions. you don't want any american to lose their house, everything they've saved because they get sick. now, i think it is more complicated than what we've heard here tonight. we're actually running significant health reform in my state. i would repeal obamacare for a variety of reasons. i would take federal resources, combined with resources, freed up with the medicaid plan and cover the people who are current the working poor, because we don't want to have tens of millions of americans losing their health insurance. and then we're driving towards total transparency. the any of you here ever get a hospital bill, it's easier to interpret the dead sea scrolls than to understand your hospital bill. the fact is, what we need is transparency with hospitals and with the providers. and i'll tell you what we will do. we are actually going to make payments to physicians and to hospitals who actually deliver health care with great quality at low prices. we actually are going to make the market work. >> governor, let me go back to

the original question about the individual mandate. in 1994, when you were in congress, you proposed a plan requiring an individual mandate. so what changed? >> well, dana, the heritage foundation had this position as well. and when i look at it, i don't think it's tenable. and we don't need to do that. again, i'm telling you that we are going to -- we have a proposal, a plan that we're enacting now, that says, if you are a hospital or a doctor, and you're providing very high-quality, at lower prices, below the mid-point, some charge high, some charge low. if you are below the mid-point, we are going to give you a financial reward for allowing you to provide services that result in high quality for our people at lower prices. that is the way in which we are going to tamp down the rising costs of health care. because if you think about your own deductibles today, they're going higher and higher and higher. and you know what, at some point, people can't afford it. our plan will work. it uses the market. it uses transparency. it gets the patient in the middle. and guess what, we're actually

doing it in my state, the seventh largest state in the country. and if this will go national, we will get our hands on health care where you will know what's going on. we will pay for quality, lower prices, and we will begin to see health care become affordable in america. and where people will also be able to have health insurance, even if they have a pre-existing condition. we don't want to throw millions of people out into the cold and not have the health insurance, dana. so that's really what we're doing. this is not a theory. this is what we are actually doing in our state. we will begin payments next year, based on episodes that we have in our lives. if our primary care physicians keep us healthy for a year, with really high quality, guess what, they will get a financial reward. our primary care physicians need help, they need support, we're losing them. this will allow them to get a reward for doing a great job. >> governor kasich, thank you. >> thank you. >> dr. carson. dr. carson, you have dealt with the sickest of patients.

you support covering pre-existing conditions. how would you change obamacare, but maintain that coverage? >> first of all, health care is not a right, but i do believe it is a responsibility for a responsible society, and we are that. we spend almost twice as much per capita on health care as many other nations who have actually much better access than we do. i propose a system in which we use health empowerment accounts, which are like a health savings account, with no bureaucrats, and we give it to everybody from birth until death. they can pass it on when they die. we pay for it with the same dollars that we pay for traditional health care with. we give people the ability to shift money within their health empowerment account, within their family. so dad's $500 short, mom can give it to him, or cousin or uncle, and it makes every family their own insurance carrier, with no middleman. it gives you enormous flexibility.

and also, you know, if uncle joe is smoking like a chimney, everybody's going to hide his cigarettes, because they're all interested in what's going on there. and also, your catastrophic health care is going to cost a lot less money now. because the only thing coming out of that is catastrophic health care. so, it's like a homeowner's policy with a large deductible, versus a homeowner's policy where you want every scratch covered. one costs $1,500 a year, one costs $10,000 a year. you can buy the $1,500 one. that will take care of 75% of the people. the people who are indigent, how do we take care of them now? medicaid. what's the medicaid budget, almost $500 billion. almost 80 million people participate, which is way too many, and that will get a lot better when we fix the economy, which i hope we get a chance to talk about. but over $5,000 for each man, woman and child. and they could have a lot more flexibility. what could you buy with that?

a concierge practice, and you could still have thousands of dollars left over. >> thank you. >> let me just finish. because i don't get to talk that much. and let's -- you have the money that's left over to buy your catastrophic insurance. but most importantly, we give them a menu, just like we do on medicare part "c," and they have the choices that will allow them not only to have catastrophic health care, but drug care, and everything else. it will be such a good program, that nobody will want obamacare after that. and that's probably the best way to do it, although if anybody still did, i would still defund it. >> thank you. thank you, dr. carson. let's talk about the economy. let's talk about -- >> wolf, wolf, wolf. does everyone get to address obamacare but me? >> i want to move on, but there'll be plenty of opportunities for you to address -- >> it's kind of an issue i have a long history with. >> i know you do. all right, go ahead. >> thank you, wolf. >> how do you get that extra time, cruz? you're very good at -- >> you know, this is another issue on which donald and i have

sharp disagreements on planned parenthood. he thinks planned parenthood is wonderful. i would instruct the department of justice to investigate them and prosecute any and all criminal violations. on obamacare, both donald and i say we want to end it, but for very different reasons. i want to end it because it's gone too far, it's killed millions of jobs, and it's hurting people's health care. donald wants to end it, because he says it doesn't go nearly far enough. and what was amazing in that exchange that's missing is that for decades donald has been advocating socialized medicine. what he's said is that the government should pay for everyone's health care. and a couple of debates ago, he said, if you don't support socialized health care, you're heartless. social democrats have been saying that for years. if you're a small business owner, donald trump's socialized medicine, putting the government in charge of your health care would kill more jobs than obamacare, and if you're elderly, the results of socialized medicine in every country on earth where it's been implemented has been rationing, has been the government saying, no, you don't get that hip replacement, you don't get that

knee replacement. the government is in charge of your health care. i'll tell you that as president, i will repeal every word of obamacare. >> thank you, thank you. mr. trump? >> i do not want socialized medicine, just so you understand. he goes around saying, he wants it. i do not want socialized medicine. i do agree with him, it's going to be a disaster, obamacare, for the economy. in 2017, it will be impossible for us the to pay for it if you look at what's going on. that's why it has to be repealed. for a lot of reasons, number one, it doesn't work. number two, you look at premiums going up, 25, 35, even 45% and more. we have to get rid of obamacare. it is going to destroy our economy completely. our economy is not doing well. it is going to destroy our economy greatly. and on that, i agree. >> donald, true or false, you've said the government should pay for everyone's health care? >> that's false. >> you've never said that? >> i said it worked in a couple of countries -- >> you've never stood on this debate stage and says it works

great in canada and scotland and we should do it here. >> no, i did not. >> did you say, if you want people to die on the streets if you don't support socialized health care, you have no heart. >> correct. i will not let people die on the streets -- let me talk. >> explain your plan, please. >> my plan is simple. we'll have private health care, but i will not allow people to die on the sidewalks and the streets of our country if i'm president. you may let it and you may be fine with it -- >> so does the government pay for everyone's health care? >> we are going -- >> yes or no. just answer the question? >> excuse me. we are going to take those people and those people are going to be serviced by doctors and hospitals. we're going to make great deals on it, but we're not going to let them die in the streets. >> who pays for it? >> i want to clarify something -- >> gentleman, please. >> i want to clarify something because that attack about letting people die in the streets --

>> gentleman, gentleman. all of you have agreed -- >> senator cruz -- >> call it what you want. >> it's a yes or no? >> call it what you want, people are not going to be dying on the sidewalk. >> all of you have agreed to the rules. i want to move on. we're talking about the economy right now. mr. trump, you want to cut taxes more than president ronald reagan did, more than president george w. bush did. the independent tax foundation says the cost to the country of your proposal would be about $10 trillion and that takes into account the economic growth that would emerge from your proposed tax cuts. how would you cut $10 trillion over ten years, but make sure the country isn't saddled with even more debt? >> because the country will become a dynamic economy. it will be dynamic again. if you look at what's going on, we have the highest taxes anywhere in the world. we pay more business tax, we pay more personal tax. we have the highest taxes in the world. it's shutting off our economy.

it's shutting off our country. we have trillions of dollars we can't get in. we will do my tax plan and it will be great. we will have a dynamic economy again. >> what specific cuts will you make to pay for that tax cut? >> we're going to make many cuts in business. we're going to get rid of so many different things. the department of education, common core is out, we're going local. have to go local. environmental protection. we waste all of this money, we're going to bring that back. we're going to cut many of the agencies and be dynamic again. >> mr. trump if you eliminate the department of education as you propose, about $68 billion. if you eliminate the environmental protection agency, that's about $8 billion. $76 billion for those two agencies. the current deficit this year is

$544 billion. where are you going to come up with the money? >> waste, fraud, and abuse. all over the place. waste, fraud, and abuse. you look at what's happening with social security. look at what's happening with every agency. waste, fraud, and abuse. we will cut so much, your head will spin. >> governor kasich, when you were in congress, you were chairman of the budget committee. you helped craft the last balanced budget the united states had. can mr. trump's plan work? >> well, i think it takes three things, wolf. and i've done it. i mean, we got the budget balanced. we cut the capital gains tax. you see, in order to get this economy moving again, you have to grow the economy and you have to restrain the spending. and when i was chairman, we cut that capital gains tax and we instituted a significant program to get the balance. we had a balanced budget four years in a row. had to take on every interest group in washington. every single one of them. and we paid down half a trillion of the national debt. and why do you do it? because you want job growth. if you don't have regulatory

reform, common sense regulations, reasonable tax cuts, which i have, and a fiscal plan, you won't get there. you will never be able to do it. i inherited an $8 billion hole in ohio. i have common sense regulations. i have tax cuts, the biggest of any governor in the country. and we have a fiscal plan. and it's not always cutting, it's innovating. it's producing a better product at frankly a lower price. now we have a $2 billion surplus. our credit is strong. our pensions are strong. and look, i've got a plan to take to washington, and i will have it there in the first hundred days, and it will include shipping welfare, education, transportation, medicaid, and job training back to us so we can begin in the states to be the laboratories of innovation. i've done it in washington, four years of balanced budgets. no one can even believe it happened. i've done it in ohio. we're growing. the jobs are up and people are having opportunity. and i will go back to washington and do it again for the american people.

i promise you that. within the first hundred days, we will have the plan to get this done. >> thank you, governor. >> speaking of taxes -- >> i just want to say, and i'm a big fan of the governor, but they also struck oil. so that helped ohio a lot. >> let me just talk about that. because i know that donald believes the energy industry is important, and so do i. but of the over 400,000 jobs that we've created in the state, we think maybe 15,000 are connected to this industry. because it's early stage. what we've done in ohio, and what a president needs to do is to have a cabinet and a whole operation that's jobs friendly. we have diversified our economy. we do have energy. we have medical devices. we have financial services. we have i.t. we just got amazon. cloud computing in the midwest. you know why it's happening? because we're balanced budgets. we're strong. we're job friendly. we don't raise the taxes. if we have a president that does that in america, we will get the economic growth, and that is what this country needs.

jobs, jobs, and jobs, period! >> mr. trump, yesterday, the last republican presidential nominee, mitt romney, called on you to release your back tax returns and said, and i'm quoting him now, there is good reason to believe there is a bombshell in them. romney said either you're not as wealthy as you say you are, said maybe you haven't paid the kind of taxes we would expect you to pay, or you haven't been giving the money to veterans or disabled people. are any of those accusations that he has leveled true? >> first of all, let me just explain. i was the first one to file a financial disclosure form. almost 100 pages. you don't learn anything about somebody's wealth with a tax return. you learn it from statements. i filed, which shows that i'm worth over $10 billion. i built a great company with very little debt. people were shocked. the people in the back, the reporters, they were shocked. i filed it on time.

i didn't ask for five 45-day extensions, which i would have been entitled to. so as far as that's concerned, i filed it. and that's where you find out what kind of a company. you don't learn anything from a tax return. i will say this. mitt romney looked like a fool when he delayed and delayed and delayed, and harry reid baited him so beautifully. and mitt romney didn't file his return until september 21st of 2012, about a month and a half before the election. and it cost him big league. as far as my return, i want to file it. except for many years, i've been audited every year. 12 years, or something like that. every year they audit me, audit me, audit me. nobody gets audited -- i have friends that are very wealthy people, they never get audited. i get audited every year. i will absolutely give my return, but i'm being audited now for two or three years, so i can't do it until the audit is finished, obviously. and i think people would understand that. >> hugh, go ahead. >> mr. trump --

>> are you going to ask anybody else a question? every single question comes to me? i know i'm good for the ratings, but it's a little bit ridiculous. >> mr. trump, a year ago you told me on my radio show, the audio and the transcript are out, they're on youtube, that you would release your tax returns. >> true. >> are you going back on your commitment? >> first of all, very few people listen to your radio show. that's the good news. let me just tell you. which happens to be true. check out the ratings. look, let me just tell you something. let me just tell you something. i want to release my tax returns, but i can't release it while i'm under an audit. we're under a routine audit. i've had it for years, i get audited. obviously, if i'm being audited, i'm not going to release a return. as soon as the audit is done, i love it. >> so senator rubio, mitt romney also called upon you to release your tax returns. your campaign said last spring

that you would release your returns, that you had not previously released. when are we going to see your return? >> tomorrow or saturday is our plan to release them. and there's nothing really that interesting in them. i have no problem releasing them. luckily, i'm not being audited this year, or last year, for that matter. but this is my time. i want to go back to this question you asked about the debt. this is an important issue. it's a huge issue. in less than five years, 83% of our entire budget will be made up of social security, medicare, medicaid, and the interest on the debt. that means only 17% of our budget will be things like the military or the department of education or environmental protection issues. you cannot balance our budget unless you deal with that 83%. which is why i've been repeatedly talking about, since my time running for the senate in florida, where there are a lot of people like my mother that depend on social security and medicare, on the need to save those programs by reforming the way they work for future generations. and i think the longer we take

to do this, the closer we are going to get to a debt crisis. and wolf, you did not get an answer to your question. this debt issue -- the next president of the united states will not be able to serve four to eight years without dealing with the national debt. it is not a question of if. it is a question of when we have a debt crisis. and we should not leave the stage here tonight without hearing a serious answer from every single one of us about how we're going to bring the national debt under control once and for all. >> thank you, senator rubio. i'm being fair to all of the candidates. senator cruz, tuesday is five days away. why haven't voters seen your 2012, 2013, and 2014 returns? >> so, i've released five years of tax returns already. we will have two more years available tomorrow. and i would note that this question really goes -- you know, donald says he's being audited. i would think that would underscore the need to release those returns. if he has said something that was false and that an audit is going to find was fraudulent,

the voters need to know. and listen, people across this country, we recognize our country is in crisis. the most important question is how do we win the general election in november 2016, and roughly 65% of republicans think donald is not the right candidate to go against hillary clinton. part of the reason, the last ten polls on real clear politics, he's lost to hillary in eight of them. in the last ten polls, i either tie or beat hillary. and this is an example. the mainstream media is laying off donald right now. they're going to pick apart his taxes, pick apart his business deals, and let's take for example one of hillary's great vulnerabilities. the corruption at the clinton foundation. the fact that she had ceos and foreign companies giving her money while he was secretary of state. the next republican nominee needs to make that case against hillary. if donald tried to do it, hillary would turn to donald and say, but gosh, donald, you gave $100,000 to the clinton foundation. i even went to your wedding.

he can't prosecute the case against hillary, and we can't risk another four years of these failed obama policies by nominating someone who loses to hillary clinton in november. >> go ahead. >> at the beginning, i said, openly to everybody that i contribute to many, many politicians, both republican and democrat. and i have over the years. i'm a businessman. i have over the years. and i sort of have to laugh when ted makes a big deal out of the fact that he's doing well in the polls. well, i'm beating him in virtually every poll. i'm tied in texas, by the way, which i shouldn't be, but i think i do very well. but, a poll just came out, a bloomberg poll where i'm beating him so badly, that it's embarrassing for me to even say i'm beating him that badly. and here's the thing. it was sort of funny. 65% of the people don't like you. i just got 36% of the vote, right? i just got 46% on another one. i got 38% on another one.

that means -- and he got 20 and 22 and he lost in south carolina so badly. that was going to be his stronghold. he said a year ago, okay, i can't lose south carolina. i beat him in a landslide. last week in nevada, i beat him in a landslide. and he's saying about the polls. one other thing, hillary clinton, take a look at "usa today." take a look at the cue poll. i beat her and i beat her badly. and i haven't even started on her. i only had one little interchange. i only had one little interchange. and that was four weeks ago when she said i was sexist and, believe me, they had a rough weekend that weekend between bill and hillary. they had a rough weekend. gentleman, gentleman, gentleman -- >> hold on, he attacked me -- >> i was about to say, senator cruz, respond. >> thank you very much. it was interesting, donald went on an extended tirade about the polls, but didn't respond to any of the substance. he has yet to say that he can release past year's tax returns,

he can do it tomorrow. he doesn't want to do it, because presumably there's something in there that's bad -- >> there's nothing. >> if not, release them tomorrow. they're already prepared. the only reason he's not releasing them is because he's afraid he'll get hit. >> i'm not afraid. >> marco made reference earlier to the litigation against trump university. it's a fraud case. his lawyers have scheduled the try for july. i want you to think about, if this man is the nominee, having the republican nominee on the stand in court, being cross-examined about whether he committed fraud. you don't think the mainstream media will go crazy on that? and on substance, how do we nominate a candidate who has said hillary clinton was the best secretary of state of modern times, who agreed with her on foreign policy, who agrees with bernie sanders on health care, who agreed with barack obama on the wall street bailout? >> all right. >> if we've got to win this election, and we can't do it with a candidate who agrees with hillary clinton and can't take it to her and beat her on the debate stage and at the polls. >> mr. trump -- hold on. mr. trump --

>> first of all, talking about the polls, i'm beating him awfully badly in the polls. >> but you're not beating hillary. you're not beating hillary. >> hey, if i can't beat her, you're really going to get killed, aren't you? so let me ask you this, because you're really getting beaten badly. i know you're embarrassed, but keep fighting. keep swinging, man. swing for the fences. let me just tell you. let me just tell you. the trump university case is a civil case, not a -- it's a civil case. it's a case where people want to try to get -- it's a case that is nonsense. it's something i could have settled many times. i could settle it right now for very little money, but i don't want to do it out of principle. the people that took the course all signed -- most -- many, many, signed report cards saying it was fantastic, it was wonderful, it was beautiful. and believe me, i'll win that case. that's an easy case. a civil case. number two, as far as the taxes are concerned, i'm being audited. it's a very routine audit. and it's very unfair, because i've been audited, for, i think, for over 12 years, everybody year, because of the size of my company, which is very, very

large, i'm being audited. which is a very large company. >> thank you. >> i'm being audited, 12 years in a row, at least. now, until that audit's done, and i don't think anybody would blame me, i'm not giving -- >> thank you, thank you. thank you. gentleman -- >> -- years you're not being audited. >> gentleman -- >> i'm being audited for those years. >> which years? >> four or five years. >> gentleman, we have rules, we're trying to obey these rules that all of you agreed. we're going to take a quick break. we have a lot more, many more critically important issues to discuss. our coverage of this tenth republican presidential debate from the university of houston continues in a moment.

(singing alougetting to know you. getting to know all about you... getting to like you. getting to hope you like me... is someone getting to know your credit? not without your say so. credit lock lets you lock and unlock your transunion

credit report with the swipe of a finger. getting to know you. getting to know all about you... get one-touch credit lock, plus your score and report at transunion.com. get in the know. choose, choose, choose. but at bedtime... ...why settle for this? enter sleep number and the ultimate sleep number event going on now. sleepiq technology tells you how well you slept and what adjustments you can make. you like the bed soft. he's more hardcore.

so your sleep goes from good to great to wow! only at a sleep number store, all beds on sale right now save 50% on the ultimate limited edition bed. know better sleep with sleep number.

i come from a big family. i'm the oldest of six. to me being the first person to go to college, it's like setting a standard, you know? my little brother is eight years old now. i challenge his curiosity, i challenge him to dream. i have to paint a picture for him. that he can look up to, and live up to, and possibly be better than. my name is jacquez, and i am your dividend. welcome back to the republican presidential debate here at the university of houston. gentleman, i want to turn our attention right now to key issues involving foreign policy

and national security. and mr. trump, i'll begin with you. >> shocking. >> you said this about the ongoing conflict between the israelis and the palestinians. i'm quoting you now. let me be sort of a neutral guy. i don't want to say whose fault it is. i don't think it helps. >> right. >> here's the question. how do you remain neutral when the u.s. considers israel to be america's closest ally in the middle east? >> well, first of all, i don't think they do, under president obama, because i think he's treated israel horribly, all right? i think he's treated israel horribly. i was the grand marshal down fifth avenue, a number of years ago, for the israeli day parade. i have very close ties to israel. i have received the tree of life award and many of the greatest awards given by israel. as president, however, there is nothing that i would rather do to bring peace to israel and its neighbors, generally, and i think it serves no purpose to say that you have a good guy and

a bad guy. now, i may not be successful in doing it. it's probably the toughest negotiation anywhere in the world of any kind, okay? but it doesn't help if i start saying, i am very pro-israel, very pro, more than anybody on this stage, but it doesn't do any good to start demeaning the neighbors. because i would love to do something with regard to negotiating peace, finally, for israel. and for their neighbors. and i can't do that as well as a negotiator, i cannot do that as well if i'm taking big, big sides. with that being said, i am totally pro-israel. >> senator cruz? >> well, this is another area on which donald agrees with hillary clinton and on which i disagree with them both strongly. both donald and hillary clinton want to be neutral, to use donald's words, between israel and the palestinians. let me be clear. if i'm president, america will stand unapologetically with the nation of israel.

and the notion of neutrality is based upon the left buying into this moral relativism that is often pitched in the media. listen, it is not equivalent, when you have terrorists strapping dynamite around their chests, exploding, and murdering innocent women and children, they are not equivalent to the idf officers protecting israel, and i will not pretend that they are. just today iran announced they're going to pay $7,000 to each suicide bomber. and i would note, missing from donald's answer was anything he has done in his nearly 70 years of living, defending israel. i have over and over again, led the fight to defend israel, to fight for israel, and this, if you want to know who will stand with israel, we ought to start with who has stood with israel, when the heat was on. >> mr. trump? >> well, i can only say, look, i can only say, i've been a big contributor to israel over the years. i've received many, many awards from israel, as i've said before, i've had a great relationship with israel and i'm going to keep it that way.

and if i could bring peace, that would be a fantastic thing. it would be one of my greatest achievements as president. >> governor kasich, i want you to weigh in. >> wolf, i was in congress for 18 years, and on the defense committee. and then, you know, after 9/11, the secretary of defense called me in to help out with some things, and i've been a supporter of israel, strong supporter of israel longer than anybody on this stage. i didn't give as much money as donald gave, but i've been standing with the israels for a very long time. and frankly, i think the problem we have in foreign policy right now, wolf, is that we are not certain, with who we stand with. our allies are not sure what to make of us and our enemies are moving. because they're not sure what we will do. it's a very interesting development here within the last 24 hours. we said to the south koreans that we would give them the high-altitude defense system. it really rattled the chinese, and for the first time since we took positive action, the chinese are beginning to take action against north korea. when we stand firm and we let

the world know who we're with, who we stand for, and we bring our allies together, that is the road forward. >> we're going to get -- >> to be able to solve the problem in this country. >> we're going to get to north korea in a moment, but senator rubio, what's wrong with the u.s. being an honest broker in a negotiation, as mr. trump is proposing? >> because, and i don't know if donald realizes this, perhaps not his intent, perhaps, but the position you've taken is an anti-israel position. and here's why. because you cannot be an honest broker in a dispute between two sides, in which one of the sides is constantly acting in bad faith. the palestinian authority has walked away from multiple efforts to make peace. very generous offers from the israelis. instead, here's what the palestinians do. they teach their 4-year-old children that killing jews is a glorious thing. here's what hamas does, they launch rockets and terrorist attacks against israel on an ongoing basis. a deal between the israelis and the palestinians is not possible. so the next president needs to

be someone like me who will stand firmly on the side of israel. i will be on a side. i will be on israel's side every single day, because they are the only pro-american, free-enterprise democracy in the entire middle east. >> mr. trump? >> i'm a negotiator. i've done very well over the years through negotiation. it's very important that we do that. in all fairness, marco is not a negotiator. i watched him melt down, and i'll tell you, it was one of the saddest things i've ever seen. he is not going down -- >> he thinks the palestinian is a real estate deal. >> these people may be tougher than chris christie. >> the palestinians are not a real estate deal, donald. >> no, no -- a deal is a deal. >> a deal is not a deal when you're dealing with terrorists. have you ever negotiated with terrorists? >> you are not a negotiator -- >> you are not a negotiator. and with your thinking, you will

never -- you will never bring peace. >> donald might be able to bring peace in condos in the palestinian areas, but he's not -- this is not a real estate deal. >> senator, senator. >> he will never be able to do it. i think i may be able to do it, although i will say this, probably, the toughest deal of any kind is that particular deal. >> let's move on and talk about north korea. you raised it, governor kasich. the threat posed by north korea to the united states and its allies. the commander of american forces in south korea said the north korean leader, kim jong-un, would use a weapon of mass destruction if he thought his regime was being threatened. you have said the united states should start examining a strategy of regime change in north korea. let's be clear. are you talking about getting rid of kim jong-un? >> when you talk about regime change, wolf, it means that regime change, that's what it means. and you know, there's so much chaos in north korea right now,

there's a lot of reports of uncertainty and instability in that government. but look, here's what i think we ought to do, immediately, and we've been kicking the can down the road on this for, i don't know, 15 years. we should be intercepting the ships that are leaving north korea, so they're not selling this material or this technology or giving it to someone else. secondly, same goes with the aircraft. thirdly, we need to slap even tougher sanctions on north korea, because we really don't have the toughest sanctions on north korea. we ought to talk about arming south korea with ballistic missile technology, and of course, also japan with ballistic missile technology. because we're now starting to take a firm position, we have the attention of the chinese. the chinese are the best way to calm that regime down and get them in a position where they back off. but when i say regime change, i don't have to talk exactly what that means. look, i've been involved in national security for a long time. you don't have to spell everything out. but what i'm telling you is, you

look for any means you can to be able to solve that problem in north korea, and in the meantime, put the pressure on the chinese and what we're doing is beginning to work against them. they are the key to being able to settle this situation. >> i just want to be precise, governor kasich, because this is critically important. there are a million north korean troops north of the dmz -- >> very well aware of that. >> a million south korean troops along the dmz, right in between. would you risk war for regime change? >> wolf, again, it would depend exactly what, you know, what was happening. what was -- what the situation was. but if there was an opportunity to remove the leader of north korea and create stability, because i'll tell you, if you keep kicking the can down the road, we're going to face this sooner or later. but in the meantime, i'm also aware of the fact that there's 10 million people living in seoul. you don't just run around making charges. i have put it on the table that i would love to see regime change in north korea. now, perhaps the chinese can actually accomplish that with this man who is now currently

the leader. but the fact is, we have to bring everything to bear. we have to be firm and we've got to unite those people in that part of the world to stand firmly against north korea and make sure we have the ballistic missile technology to defend ourselves. >> mr. trump? >> one thing i would like to add to what the governor is saying, i think that we are now in a position, we owe $19 trillion, because of the horrible omnibus budget that was approved six weeks ago. it's going to be $21 trillion. we can no longer defend all of these countries, japan, germany, south korea. you order televisions, you order almost anything, you're getting it from these countries. whether it's a mercedes-benz or whether it's an air-conditioning unit. they're coming out of these countries. they are making a fortune. saudi arabia, we are defending saudi arabia. before the oil went down, now they're making less, but they're making plenty. they were making $1 billion a day. we defend all of these countries for peanuts. you talk about budgets, we have to start getting reimbursed for

taking care of the military services for all of these countries. >> hold on. hold on. >> dr. carson -- >> hey, wolf. let me just say this, because he mentioned, he mentioned this. look, we're all in agreement that the japanese need to do more. we're all in agreement that the europeans need to do more. but i hate to just tell everybody, we are the leader of the world, and we should put the pressure on them to do their job. note, there is no question about it. but at the same time, we also have to rebuild the military. look, i have a balanced budget plan that cuts taxes, reforms regulations, but also helps build the military. puts $100 billion more in defense. we need to rebuild our defenses. but i must also tell you, as a longtime reformer of the pentagon, we must reform that building. we can't have a weapons system take 22 1/2 years. we have 800,000 bureaucrats working for d.o.d., performing bureaucratic functions, when we ought to be putting these resources into the military. so we can do it all. we can do it all. >> dr. carson, how would you

deal with north korea? >> okay, first of all, people say that i whine a lot, because i don't get time. i'm going to whine. because i didn't get asked about taxes. i didn't get asked about israel. hugh, you said you were going to be fair to everybody. you didn't ask me about taxes. i had something to say about that. >> go ahead. this is your moment. >> okay. we have a system of taxation in this country that is horribly wrong. you know, i never had an audit until i spoke at the national prayer breakfast. then all of a sudden, they came in, they said, we just want to look at your real estate dealings. and then they didn't find anything, so they said, let's look at the whole year. they didn't find anything, so they said, let's look at the next year and the next year, and they didn't find anything, and they won't find anything, because i'm a very honest person. but the fact of the matter is, the irs is not honest and we need to get rid of them.

as far as israel is concerned, when i was there several months ago, i talked to a lot of people. i couldn't find a single one who didn't think that we had turned our backseat on israel. you know, they are a strategic partner for us, but also, recognize that we have a judeo-christian foundation. and the last thing we need to do is to reject israel. doesn't mean we can't be fair to other people. we can always be fair to other people, but it's like when you have a child. you know, you want to be fair to all the children around, but you have a special attention for your own child. and now, as far as north korea is concerned, you know, kim jong-un is an unstable person. but he does understand strength. and i think we have to present strength to him. we should be encouraging the alliance with japan and south korea.

we should be encouraging the placement of the t.h.a.d., the terminal high altitude defense. and we must have a much more robust naval presence in that area. and i think we need to be developing a strategic defense initiative. because this man is going to have long-range missiles. he is going to have nuclear capabilities. we need to be able to defend ourselves. and lastly, we should make sure that he knows that if he ever shoots a missile at us, it will be the last thing he ever does. >> thank you, thank you. we're going to continue national security. go ahead, hugh. >> thank you, wolf. mr. trump, we are less than 24 hours away from a cease-fire in syria that has been brokered between the u.s. and russia. do you support this cease-fire? >> i really don't, because it's not working and the countries aren't agreeing to it and the rebels aren't agreeing and syria is not agreeing to it.

it's a meaningless cease-fire. i love the idea of a cease-fire, i love the idea with a total cessation, but it's not working, as you know very well. it's not working. if we can do all we want with russia, but nobody else is adhering to it, so i certainly support it. i would certainly love it, but all parties have to be part of it. >> senator cruz, your opinion on the cease-fire? >> well, look, we're certainly hopeful that the violence will cease, but, there's reason to be highly skeptical. russia has enhanced its position, because of obama's weakness in the middle east, weakness in syria, and you know, as we're headed to november, we need to nominate a republican candidate that can lay out a clear difference with barack obama and hillary clinton on foreign policy. one of the real challenges with both donald and senator rubio is that they have agreed over and over again with both hillary clinton and barack obama. so, for example, in libya, both of them agreed with the obama/clinton policy of toppling the government in libya. that was a disaster. it gave the country over to

radical islamic terrorism and it endangered america. another example is john kerry. john kerry, senator rubio, voted to confirm john kerry as secretary of state. i voted against him, and donald trump supported john kerry against george w. bush in 2004, gave him a check, and john kerry has been the most anti-israel secretary of state this country has ever seen. his diplomacy has been a disaster, and if we nominate someone who agreed with john kerry, barack obama, and hillary clinton on foreign policy, we're not in a strong position to win the general election. >> a response, mr. trump, then mr. rubio? >> again, i think i gave both checks to be exactly honest. i think they both like me very much. >> you called for bush to be impeached. >> well, i think bush did a hell of a bad job, as far as that's concerned -- >> but you gave him a check and called him to be impeached? >> no, this was before. the check came early.

but he's saying i was in favor of syria. he's saying i was in favor of libya. i never discussed that subject. i was in favor of libya? we would be so much better off if gadhafi were in charge right now. if these politicians went to the beach and didn't do a thing and we had saddam hussein and if we had gadhafi in charge instead of having terrorism all over the place, we'd be -- at least they killed terrorists, all right? and i'm not saying they were good, because they were bad. they were really bad. but we don't know what we're getting. you look at libya right now, isis, as we speak, is taking over their oil, as we speak. it's a total mess. we would have been better off if the politicians took a day off instead of going into war. >> senator rubio? >> yeah, a couple points. number one, on the libya situation, we didn't topple gadhafi. the libyan people toppled gadhafi. the only choice before america that this president had to make is, did it happen quickly or take a long time? and i argued, if it takes a long time, you'll have rebel forces emerge like these radical islamists that take advantage of the vacuum. that's where the term lead from behind came.

that's the foreign policy that senator cruz appears to agree with. and on john kerry, yeah, you know why? because every day john kerry wasn't appointed was another day hillary clinton was still in charge of the state department. and she was absolutely horrible. i couldn't imagine that they were going to find somebody even worse than her. but this president never ceases to amaze. and the last point i would make on south korea, and this is important. because we're asking to be commander in chief. donald is asking to be commander in chief. and he's saying, these guys need to do more. south korea contributes $800 million a year to that effort. and japan contributes as well. and here's why our commitment to that regional security is so critical, donald. because if we give -- if we walk away from them, both japan and south korea will become nuclear weapons powers. they can do that very quickly. and that's what they will do if the american defense agreements withers away. which is why we have to rebuild the military, but why we can't walk away from our asia-pacific defense status. >> mr. trump? >> i never said walk we. i wouldn't walk to walk away. i want them to pay us much more money. we cannot afford to subsidize -- >> how much? >> a lot.

i'll negotiate a lot more money than you'll ever get. as far as john kerry is concerned, there has been no tougher critic of this man -- i think he negotiated one of the worst deals in the history of our country, the iran deal, where they get their $150 billion and all of the other things that take place. it is a disaster for this country and speaking of israel, it's a disaster for israel. i'm no fan of -- >> senator cruz. hold on, hold on, governor. senator cruz? >> it's interesting, donald just said he never came out in favor of toppling gadhafi in libya. well, he stated that in an interview, that it will be on our website, tedcruz.org, you can see and hear the exact words from donald's mouth. and i assume when he sees that interview -- maybe he forgot about it -- and i assume that donald will apologize when he sees that he said exactly that. with regard to john kerry, i will say john kerry's foreign policy has been a disaster for decades. that's why i voted against him when it came up. and the fact that donald trump would write him a check and support him against george w. bush shows exceptionally poor

foreign policy judgment. and i'll give one more example on israel. when the obama administration canceled civilian air flights into the nation of israel, when hamas was raining rockets down on them, i publicly asked, is this an economic boycott against israel? the next day, michael bloomberg, another new york billionaire, got on a plane, a commercial flight, and flew to israel from london, the heat and light put on the state department was so great that within 36 hours, they lifted the ban on air flights into israel. during that entire battle, and indeed during every battle on israel, the natural question is, where was donald? if this is something that he cares about, why has he supported anti-israel politicians from jimmy carter to hillary clinton, to john kerry, for four decades. if you care about israel, you don't write checks to politicians who are undermining israel. instead, you stand and support the national security of america and -- >> wait a minute. >> there's a point that needs to be made here. >> governor, governor, he attacked mr. trump.

mr. trump has a right to respond. >> well, look, my response is very simple. there is nobody on this stage that has done more for israel than i have. nobody. you might say, you might talk, you're politicians, all talk, n. i've been watching it all my life. you are all talk and no action. what i've seen up here, i mean, first, this guy's a joke artist, and this guy's a liar. he can't do it for the obvious reason, and he can't do it because he doesn't know how to tell the truth. other than that. i rest my case. >> one at a time. governor kasich, you have the floor. >> i've got a response to that. >> you will have a response, but i promised governor kasich he could respond. >> could somebody attack me, please? [cheers and applause] >> there's something -- i want

to, i want to point out something here today that is so critically important about how the obama administration has really done such a ridiculous, feckless job here in foreign policy. first of all, we should have been supporting the rebels long ago. they could have taken assad out. and because we did nothing, the russians are now in, and they're sitting in the cat bird seat. we should have been helping them. i'm thankful that the aid trucks are finally getting into syria, but the fact is, had we acted we would have solved that problem. let's talk about libya. libya didn't go down because it was some people revolution. hillary clinton, samantha power and all the other people convinced obama to undermine gadda gaddafi. and they created a cesspool in libya. we have to deal with it. there are not many major cities in libya. they're on the coast. mostly it's desert, but it's a

problem. then we have isis in syria and isis in iraq. and because this country has not had a strong and firm foreign policy, one of us here is going to inherit a total mess, and we're going to have to work our way out of it, including the need to arm the ukrainians. they have been ignored, and we need to help them as well and assert ourselves as america. >> let's continue the questioning on isis. >> you said i've got a response. >> you will have a chance. >> you called me a liar. you saying i can't respond to being called a liar? >> go ahead and respond. >> you know, what we're seeing with donald is actually the pattern of washington. the pattern of washington deal makers. they make promises, break their word and when anyone calls you on it they call you a liar. he said for example seven months ago, i, donald trump was a member of the establishment. there's a reason why harry reid thinks he's the biggest republican up here.

there's a reason jimmy carter said he would support donald trump over me, because he's malleable, whereas ted cruz is not malusualleablmalleable. falsely accusing someone of lying is itself a lie. [cheers and applause] >> i watched. i watched the lobbyists. i watched what this man did. [ laughter ] to dr. ben carson, who i respect in iowa. where he said ben carson is out of the race, he left iowa and is out of the race. i thought that was disgraceful. he got a lot of votes. took them away from ben carson, probably took them away from me, too. but i also watched where he did a forum that looked like it came right out of a government agency

that said on top, voter violation, and it graded you, and it scared the hell out of people. and it said the only way you clear up the violation essentially is to go and vote for troo for ted cruz. to me, that was worse than what he did to ben. i know politicians, better than you do. and it's not good. >> i believe you know politicians much better than i do, because for 40 years you've been funding liberal democratic politicians. >> i funded you! >> you're welcome to have the check back. >> i gave him a check! >> you gave me $5,000. and by the way, let's be clear. donald -- [cheers and applause] donald claims to care -- >> you know why? >> donald, i understand rules are very hard for you. they're very confusing. >> i have his book. >> on tv. >> thank you for the book. thank you for the book.

>> donald, can you get back on your nest now. >> a lot of fun up here i have to tell you. thank you for the book. >> donald, relax. >> i'm relaxed. ar you're the basket case. don't get nervous. go ahead. >> i promise you, donald, there's nothing about you that makes anyone nervous. people are actually watching this at home. >> i don't know what's happening. >> gentlemen, gentlemen. >> you've got to stop this! take control. >> the latest debate. gentlemen, please. >> i get my answer. >> i want to move on. these are the rules. we're moving on. >> he called me a liar and interrupted the whole time. [cheers and applause] >> do i not get a response? do i not get a response without getting interrupted? >> you'll get plenty of response, so stand by. i want to talk about isis right now. and the federal government. how best to keep americans safe from isis. there's a huge battle under way right now between the tech giant apple and the federal government.

federal government wants apple to unlock the phone used by that san bernardino terrorist to prevent future attacks. apple has refused, saying it with compromise the security of all of its customers. and just this afternoon they went to court to block the judge's order. dana bash, pick up the questioning. >> senator rubio, you say it's complicated and that, quote, apple isn't necessarily wrong to refuse the court order. why shouldn't investigators have everything at their disposal? >> no, in fact what i have said is, the only thing, the fbi made this clear 48 hours ago. the only thing thiey are asking of apple is to use their own systems to try to guess the password of the san bernardino killer. apple said we're being ordered to create a back door to the encryption device. allow us to disable the self-destruct mode so that we can guess what the password was.

i think they should comply request that. they are not asking apple to create a back door to encryption. >> just to be clear, you did say on cnn a couple weeks ago, this is a complicated issue. apple is not necessarily wrong here. >> because at the time, apple was claiming the order was to create a back door to the encryption device. >> if were you president, would you order your justice department to force them to comply with the order. >> to try to guess the password? >> right. >> absolutely. that iphone didn't even belong to the killer. it belonged to the killer's employee. that's all they're asking them to do is to disable the self-destruct mode on one phone in the entire world. but apple doesn't want to do it, because they think it hurts their brand. their brand is not superior to the security of the united states of america. [cheers and applause] >> senator cruz, apple's ceo tim cook says this would be bad for america. where do you stand?

national security or personal privacy? >> as you know, at that same cnn forum, marco and i were asked this same question. his answer, he was on both sides of the fence, he's now agreeing with me. i'm glad. what i said is yes, apple should be forced to comply with this court order, why, because under the amendments, a search and seizure is legal if there is probable cause. in this instance, the order is not put a back door in everyone's cell phone. if that was the order, that order would be problematic, because it would compromise safety and security for everyone. i would agree with apple on that broad policy question. but on the question of unlocking this cell phone of a terrorist, we should enforce the court order and find out everyone that terrorist at san bernardino talked to on the phone, texted with, e-mailed and absolutely apple doesn't have a right to defy a valid court order in a terror investigation. >> dr. carson, tim cook, the ceo of apple says this would be bad for america. what do you think?

>> i think allowing terrorists to get away with things is bad for america. [ applause ] we have, we have a constitution. we have the fourth amendment. it guards us against illegal and unreasonable search and seizure, but we have mechanisms in place, with the judicial system that will allow us to gain material that is necessary to benefit the nation as a whole or the community as a whole. and that's why we have pfizer courts and things of that nature. so absolutely, i would expect apple to comply with the court order. if they don't comply with that, you encouraging chaos in our system. >> mr. trump -- [ applause ] >> i want to weigh in on this, please. i want to just tell you that the problem is not right now between the administration and apple. you know what the problem is? where's the president been? you sit down in a back room, and you sit down with the parties,

and you get this worked out. you don't litigate this on the front page of the "new york times," where everybody in the world is reading about the, their dirty laundry out here. the president of the united states should be convening a meeting, should have convened a meeting with apple and our security forces and then you know what you do when you're the president? you lock the door, and you say you're not coming out until you reach an agreement that both gives the security people what they need and protects the rights of americans. this is a failure of his leadership to get this done as an executive should be doing it, and i'll tell you, that's why you want a governor. i do this all the time! and we reach agreements all the time, because in the executive, you've got to solve problems instead of fighting on the front page of the newspaper. >> thank you, governor. [cheers and applause] >> thank you. >> mr. trump, you have been very vocal about securing the mexican border. but isis has called upon its supporters to conduct attacks in

our neighbor to the north, canada. as a matter of fact, u.s. officials have warned that it is the canadian border, which is the most significant threat. you have said that you will not build a wall in canada. when it comes to national security and the threat of terrorism, why does mexico need a wall? and canada doesn't? isn't that like closing the front door and leaving the back door open? >> first of all, you're talking about a wall that's many, many times longer. we have far less problem with that border than the southern border. and tremendous amounts, i had the privilege of winning by a landslide, by the way, new hampshire. you go to new hampshire, the first thing they talk about is heroin and drugs pouring in. and you wouldn't think this beautiful place, beautiful with the trees and the roads and the countryside. the biggest problem is heroin. and it's such a shame to see it. they're pouring in from the southern border. so i'm talking about great security, a wall that can

absolutely be built, and i'll build it on time, on budget, it will be a very high wall, a great wall, it will be paid for by canada, by the way. maybe i'll get canada to pay. it's going to be paid for by mexico. the problem with canada, you're talking about a massively long piece. a boarder that would be about four times longer. it would be very, very hard to do. and it is not our biggest problem. i don't care what anybody says. it's not our big problem. our problem is not only people coming in and in many cases the wrong people, it's the tremendous amount of drugs that are coming in. [ applause ] >> i want to talk to you, senator rubio about puerto rico. as you know, puerto rico is in the midst of financial collapse, unable to pay $72 billion. puerto rico is asking for bankruptcy protection, which will give puerto rico and puerto ricans, which are u.s. citizens, you know that, the tools to

restructure the debt that is the same debt other 50 states have. you oppose granting port rico that bankruptcy protection. you say that it is only last resort measure. but the government of puerto rico has said that bankruptcy is its last resort. that that's where they are now. how do you explain this very strong stance to the hundreds of thousands of puerto ricans that vote across the u.s. and particularly in your state of florida. >> sure, because bankruptcy doesn't work unless you change the way you're operating or you're going to be bankrupt again. it's not growing. it has a massive exodus of professionals who are leaving and going to florida and the mainland from puerto rico, because their economy is not growing. the tax rate is too high. the government regulations are too extensive. with all the problems they're having, they barely cut their budget from one year to the next. the leadership on the island has

to get their house in order. ft. economy in puerto rico doesn't grow, they will never generate the revenue to pay this debt or the billions on their books. so yes, if they do all of those things, then we can explore the use of bankruptcy protection, but not as the first resort, which is what they're asking for, because it will not solve the problems on the island, and you're going to continue to see hundreds of thousands of people leave that beautiful place and come into the mainland. they're united states citizens. they're obviously entitled to do so and we welcome them, but we would like to see a puerto rico growing economically and is robust, around the leaders are doing a terrible job. their previous governor was doing a wonderful job until he lost the election to someone who is taking them in the big government direction. i want our viewers to stay with us. there's still much more to come including the last pitch in the

final debate before super tuesday. [ applause ] ♪ let me talk to you about retirement. a 401(k) is the most sound way to go. let's talk asset allocation. sure. you seem knowledgeable, professional. would you trust me as your financial advisor? i would. i would indeed. well, let's be clear here. i'm actually a dj. [ dance music plays ] [laughs] no way! i have no financial experience at all. that really is you? if they're not a cfp pro, you just don't know. find a certified financial planner professional

who's thoroughly vetted at letsmakeaplan.org. cfp -- work with the highest standard. do something! get on the floor! oh i'm not a security guard, i'm a security monitor. i only notify people if there is a robbery. there's a robbery. why monitor a problem if you don't fix it? that's why lifelock does more than free credit monitoring to protect you from identity theft. we not only alert you to identity threats, if you have a problem, we'll spend up to a million dollars on lawyers and experts to fix it. lifelock. join starting at $9.99 a month.

welcome back to the university of houston. it's time now for closing statements, all of you will have 30 seconds. dr. carson, we'll start with you. >> first of all, i want people to think about, what kind of leader do you want, and what kind of person do you want your kids to emulate? think about that. secondly, several years ago, an of momovie was made about these hands. these hands, by the grace of god have saved many lives and healed many families. i'm asking you tonight, america, to join hands with me to heal, inspire and revive america. if not us, who?

and if not now, when? [ applause ] >> governor kasich? >> the last usa today poll had me beating hillary clinton by 11 points. more than anybody on this stage. secondly, i hope you saw tonight that executive experience really matters. it matters in terms of growing our economy, balancing budgets, cutting taxes, reforming regulations. i've done it in washington. i've done it in ohio, and i can go back to washington and do it again, but i also hope you notice tonight that i do have the foreign policy experience, not just a few years, but a lot of years, working with a lot of the great, great minds of this country to develop the firmness and the toughness to bring people together. i hope you would give me your vote. i would appreciate it very much, and we won't have to spend time figuring out what we will do. i will hit the ground moving and we will get america moving again. thank you all very much.

[cheers and applause] >> senator rubio? >> thank you for having us tonight. you know, this campaign has come a long way. it was just a few months ago there were 15 or 11 of us on the stage, and it's narrowing. the time for games is over. i know you've had a lot of choices to make, but now it's time to narrow it down. and i'm asking you to get behind me. go on our website and join our effort, marco rubio.com so we can bring an end to the silliness, the looniness. and bring america back to what being the bearer of conservatism. >> there are several deal makers on this stage, but there is one person who has consistently stood up to both parties

fighting against washington deals. if i'm elected president e on the first day in office, i will reskinned every single every illegal executive action. i will open an investigation into planned parenthood and prosecute any violations. i will instruct every agency that the persecution ends today. and i will begin the process of moving the american embassy in israel to jerusalem. we will repeal obamacare, abolish the irs, secure the border and bring back jobs. [cheers and applause] >> mr. trump? >> thank you. nobody knows politicians better than i do. they're all talk. they're no action. nothing gets done. i've watched it for years. take a look at what's happening to our country. all of the things that i've been talking about, whether it's trade, whether it's building up our depleted military, whether

it's taking care of our vets. whether it's getting rid of common core, which is a disaster, or knocking out obamacare and coming up with something so much better, i will get it done. politicians will never, ever get it done, and we will make america great again. [cheers and applause] thank you. >> mr. trump, thank you. and thanks to each of the candidates on behalf of everyone here at cnn and tell municipemu. also my thanks to the panel. super tuesday is only five days away. right now anderson cooper picks up our special coverage. anderson? [ applause ] >> wolf, thanks very much. there it is, the final republican debate here in houston before the biggest primary day so far, super tuesday. the final opportunity before 13

states decide for every candidate not named donald trump to face donald trump head on. the smoke clearing from what was a very, very fiery debate. the candidates making their way to the cameras. i'm anderson cooper in the spin room, and yes, they really do call it that. we have jake tapper with his panel, chris cuomo, moderator wolf blitzer, our correspondents as well as the best team of analysts and campaign professionals around. let's get a first take from them, first. chief correspondent john king, nia malika henderson is joining me. amanda carpenter. jeffrey lord, s.c. cup. sc's a conservative columnist. john king, let's start with you. what a night. the fire, the hostility at times on that debate stage intense.

>> very aggressive marco rubio, very aggressive at times ted cruz, saying on issue after issue, ted cruz is not a conservative. they prosecute that pretty effectively. the question is, why did they wait till the tenth debate? why did they wait ten debates for donald trump to be so far out ahead. >> chris cuomo has donald trump, let's listen in. you're on. >> here we are, mr. trump. you were in the middle of the stage tonight. it seemed at times that it was two-on-one, your head was on a swivel with cruz and robb yubio right on you. >> they're politicians. they want to get elected, but they are doing badly, and i think cnn did a very good job, but i think they had a lot of focus on the three in the middle. maybe that's the way it should be. i thought it was exciting, and i thought it was great. >> what did you think of that dynamic of having to take both

o them on. >> i thought it was fine. i've dealt with the toughest people in the world over my lifetime, and i've dealt with much tougher. i thought it was fine. i really enjoyed it. i enjoy the debating process. >> what do you think that brought out to your advantage? >> i think they can see that i'm a guy that can handle people. i've created great jobs and great companies and a really great company. it shows what you're made of. i've enjoyed the process. i've actually enjoyed every single debate. >> during that debate, as it was going on, marco rubio started on his website sell watches as a pretend gimmick to say that they were watches that would have been yours that you would have been selling, but they're donations to him. it was a quick response. what do you make of the move? >> he's a joke artist. he jokes. he did it in front of chris christie. i look over and say are you okay? it looked like he just came out of a swimming pool. he was soaking wet. and he kept repeating himself, repeating himself.

>> he tried to use that on you. >> i didn't do any repeating. i just say what's needed. we can't have a joke artist. one thing i've learned from sports. i was actually a very good athlete. when you're a joker, you're always a joker. we can't have that. we can't take any chances in this country. >> how long, now that you're starting to get the votes in and you're at the top, do you think that people should start thinking about leaving this race? >> i think so, buff t it's not me to say. marco, i'm 20 points up on him in florida, and with cruz it's even. i'm winning every other state. yeah, i think so. i think it's going to be over fairly quickly, and i don't think there's going to be a convention. >> it seemed like senator rubio was more intient on going at yo than senator cruz. did he he show you toughness that you didn't see against christie? >> it's the same basic person. he's pouring sweat.

i've never seen anything like it. i don't know what the problem is. but he's just pouring down sweat. we have to have somebody that doesn't sweat. we need somebody that when they walk into putin's office, or putin walks into our office or the chinese come to deal with us, we know what we're doing. we need somebody who doesn't have whatever it is that he's got. >> there was an observation. i want to see if you share it. was that sometimes you like to use tough language about people. certainly in tweets as we know. but tonight they said that you weren't doing it, that you were doubling down on your positions and trying to argue on a policy level more than a personal level, was that intentional? >> i think was intentional, because i am leading by so much. that attitude got me here. now it's time. and i'm very focussed on policy. i went to the best college and got very good marks. we had a total of 17 people. we're now down to five. that got me there. but now i think i have a little bit of a different attitude. >> do you think that the race is over for the nomination? >> no, i never say it's over.

it's not over until it's over, as our friend would say, yogi. i love that bloomberg poll that did many of the southern states. and we're just leading by tremendous numbers. >> do you think when you're standing on that stage tonight, specifically as you said, it was a focus, sort of a three-man dynamic. >> i think it was very unfair to ben carson and to the governor. they weren't asked very many questions, and, you know, they are the final five. and i actually thought ben in particular was treated unfairly. i don't think he was asked enough questions. it wasn't right. >> well, a little bit of it was obviously what the players decide to do, right? when two of them decide to start using their energy to talk about each other, that's what happens. >> he has a right to be upset, but that's up to cnn. and the same is true with kasich, but i think, i just enjoyed it. i had a good time. i was in the middle of it, and i enjoyed the process. i enjoyed the process, and i like debating. >> something in the news which

is at your control is the tax returns. mitt romney during the debate was bringing it up again. you could show them in a second if you want to. >> mitt is a guy who was a horrible candidate. he lost a race that should have been won and should have been won easily. i don't know what happened. he like disappeared the last race. but when mitt gave his tax returns, it was like six months from now in 2012. it was exactly september 21st. and that's when he gave his tax return. we're in a different world. so, you know, mitt is just trying to remain relevant. nobody's talking to him much anymore. he got some publicity today. but the one problem i have is i'm always audited by the irs. which i think is very unfair. i don't know, maybe because of religion, maybe because of something else, maybe because i'm doing this. >> what do you mean religion? >> maybe because the fact that i'm a strong christian and i feel strongly about it and maybe there's a bias. >> you think you get audited for being a strong person?